Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Does anyone remember the super tourers of the mid 90s- early 00s? The weight penalties were something like FWD 0kg, RWD 50kg, 4WD 150kg... The group A GTRs had a massive weight penalty over the Sierras to start with but by the end of racing were carrying a heap more weight and boost restrictions that were not applied to the Sierras, anyone remember how that went? I am not going to get into science and big noting myself, because it is very simple, 4WD gives better grip, allowing you to use more HP, sooner. The rallying is very relevant simply because it highlights the difference by reducing the grip. I cannot think of a race series that allows 4WD where it is not unbeatable (no, I do not care about drag racing)

  • Replies 130
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

the long and the short of it is that no matter which side you are on, group A is an extremely poor example to use. the rules and regulations were pretty ordinary, and manufacturers could build a car that was right on th elimit, make enough road going models to get it allowed to race and that was it, meanwhile other car companies were simply beefing up existing models to make them a little bit better.

i would've like to had seem how the AWD turbo falcon that ford was working on (but ended up scrapping) would've gone against the GTR.

oh and i remember the super tourers that were all 4 cylinders (basically what the BTCC is). because of parity regulations neither fwd, rwd or awd dominated, however in the wet the audi's did very well, being awd.

That was why I mentioned the Supertourers/BTCC, very tightly regulated and controlled, they wrote rules to hobble the 4WDs, then outlawed them. So in summary, OP, was it Tyres?, asked for opinions, my OPINION, Build a 4WD, which means if you want to restrict it to a Skyline GTR, but an Evo will make a better cheaper track car... Puts on Wizard hat and robe... Realises flame suit will do shit all on this one...

I had a run against my mate in his GTS-T and my GTR. His car had more rwkw than mine yet at the track the GTR would walk away from in the corners. If you add more power to the GTST the situation will only get worse, not better. Ive owned and driven everything turbo in the R32 guise and the GTR is at the top of tree im afraid.

Did I just get owned in my own thread? I think I did :thumbsup:. Thanks guys, gonna sell my Skyline and get a cheap 'run around' til i'm in the opens. Not much I can argue, I can already see oversteer is possible from the videos NISMO has posted, with limited grip levels even as an AWD from high power.

Marc: Last time I checked the rules of Group A racing (just then), there was no rule on the compound of tyre you can run so I'm assuming that it was a modern day spec Group A GTR. Why did Ford scrap the AWD turbo Falcon? They released the XR6T anyways so I don't see why they wouldn't just release it as an AWD, surely it wouldn't cost that much more to develop unless a certain drivetrain works better for some cars?

djr81: Not saying I don't believe you or anything but you're saying that the more static load a tyre has, the less grip it will have? It would at least make sense if the tyre's coefficient of grip decreased with decreased load because of the area of tyre patch. Is there an explanation? If given a weight heavy enough, would the coeffecient of friction become 0? (LOL logic) Or would it just asymptote? For your information I have read Carroll Smith's Drive To Win and am a big fan of his books. In regards to the GTSR comment, the G35/V35 is actually pretty much just as fast as a R32 GTR (Reference

skip to 3:45 onwards), it's FR and it weighs more. Hows that work if AWD was so superior and modern?

Iplen: Yeah it's true, Evos dominate the top places in TA because their AWD system is actually sophisticated with all the yaw controls etc, probably as developed as the R34 GTR system. Spoke to a few Evo owners and they said it was cheaper, and more reliable to track the Evo instead of a GTR.

RBNT: But the GTS-T had you in terms of acceleration right? More wheels to spin = more drivetrain loss. What aero and tyres was he running compared to you? Who had a better lap time? (No I don't wanna hear excuses if you lost lol)

Edited by TyresBro

Did I just get owned in my own thread? I think I did :thumbsup:. Thanks guys, gonna sell my Skyline and get a cheap 'run around' til i'm in the opens. Not much I can argue, I can already see oversteer is possible from the videos NISMO has posted, with limited grip levels even as an AWD from high power.

Marc: Last time I checked the rules of Group A racing (just then), there was no rule on the compound of tyre you can run so I'm assuming that it was a modern day spec Group A GTR. Why did Ford scrap the AWD turbo Falcon? They released the XR6T anyways so I don't see why they wouldn't just release it as an AWD, surely it wouldn't cost that much more to develop unless a certain drivetrain works better for some cars?

djr81: Not saying I don't believe you or anything but you're saying that the more static load a tyre has, the less grip it will have? It would at least make sense if the tyre's coefficient of grip decreased with decreased load because of the area of tyre patch. Is there an explanation? If given a weight heavy enough, would the coeffecient of friction become 0? (LOL logic) Or would it just asymptote? For your information I have read Carroll Smith's Drive To Win and am a big fan of his books. In regards to the GTSR comment, the G35/V35 is actually pretty much just as fast as a R32 GTR (Reference

skip to 3:45 onwards), it's FR and it weighs more. Hows that work if AWD was so superior and modern?

Iplen: Yeah it's true, Evos dominate the top places in TA because their AWD system is actually sophisticated with all the yaw controls etc, probably as developed as the R34 GTR system. Spoke to a few Evo owners and they said it was cheaper, and more reliable to track the Evo instead of a GTR.

RBNT: But the GTS-T had you in terms of acceleration right? More wheels to spin = more drivetrain loss. What aero and tyres was he running compared to you? Who had a better lap time? (No I don't wanna hear excuses if you lost lol)

the awd falcon was in developement back in the 80's (was going to be a 268kw AWD twin turbo XF).

No, I'm saying they probably scrapped the AWD XF and invested the rest of the money into the creation of the RS200... (yes it did have a turbo as well as AWD)

you do realise that the rs200 finished production around the same time that they started the AWD XF designing. it was more likely scrapped because of new emissions laws, and the fact that the XF model was scrapped for the EA.

rs200 was actually AWD

Marc and I don't agree to often, but yeah, RS2000 was RWD, RS 200 was not, mid engined 1.8 turbo, with 4WD, twin shocks and there was some sort of tricky gearbox too, dual range or something from memory. The Evolution was going to be 2l. Was released for the RAC Lombard at the end of 85, part way through 86 it was announced that group B was to be finished as well as Group S which was due to replace it, following the death of Henri Toivenen and Sergio Cresto as well as an RS200 crew after they ploughed into spectators. When Ford/cosworth were developing this thing they could not have cared less what a little tuning company in Aus was doing..

....and yes, you got owned in your own thread

gud werk

No I didn't get owned actually. In the end, you guys ran outta arguments or couldn't answer your own statements :cheers:

This brng out the other question in the events of owning a GTR, would you install an AWD torque split controller? And if yes, what would you set it to on the track? Be honest. If no, why?

Edited by TyresBro

No I didn't get owned actually. In the end, you guys ran outta arguments or couldn't answer your own statements :cheers:

This brng out the other question in the events of owning a GTR, would you install an AWD torque split controller? And if yes, what would you set it to on the track? Be honest. If no, why?

Yes you would install a torque split controller (On a 32 in my experience). You then set it up to transfer as much torque forward as possible (based on the assumption it is of the type that interferes with the lateral accelerometer input to the ATTESSA system).

The GTR's were set up to drive nicely on the road. How you set the up for the track is a whole different story.

Yes you would install a torque split controller (On a 32 in my experience). You then set it up to transfer as much torque forward as possible (based on the assumption it is of the type that interferes with the lateral accelerometer input to the ATTESSA system).

The GTR's were set up to drive nicely on the road. How you set the up for the track is a whole different story.

djr81 Are you messing with us? Not saying it's incorrect (or correct), first you say that the less load on a tyre the higher coefficient of grip but now you say with a torque split controller to put as much power to the front wheels as possible. So in a way, on top of the already understeering and front heavy R32 GTR, you give it more understeer?

I was only agreeing with you.

My knowledge is from experience, not google.

Well I take it back :P

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • Driveability will be about the same with either externally venting BOV, or no BOV at all. Perhaps worse one way than the other, with me thinking that the definitely more flow going through the AFM through a venting BOV more likely to cause rich stalls than the perhaps more flow that the AFM might read on reversion. There is no such thing as "turbo damage" from not having a BOV at stock, or even quite a lot higher than stock, power levels. You need a big turbo with a lot of mass spinning hard getting a horrible slowdown from a slammed shut throttle before there is anything like the shaft loads required to damage things. Not an issue on small turbos. The ONLY 2 reasons that Nissan put a recirc valve onto the RB were: It is a bypass valve. It is open when under vacuum. When not on boost, it bypasses intake air forward around the compressor, which unloads the compressor, allowing the turbine to sping more freely, making the whole lot a bit more efficient when just puddling around. Throttle response should also be faster via the shorter, smaller diameter BOV pipe (when in NA, ie before the BOV closes and boost is building) which is nicer for driveability. Emissions. The reversion causes CO pulses. Eliminate the reversion (or at least, keep it away from the AFM) and you don't get that. The stalling/driveability aspect could have been tuned around, as shown one example of by dose above, if Nissan hadn't put a recirc valve on. Many many turbo engines before the RB had no BOV. They did not stall. See the RB30 turbo as an example. Nistune is definitely better than just stock ECU. It allows you to access and change things that are not excellent on the stock setup, and allows you to do mods like put decent injectors in, relocate the AFM, put a bigger turbo or even cams, etc, on, change to coil swith completely different swell needs, etc etc. All the things that you might need or want to do 25 years after the car was new. Aftermarket replacement ECU is obviously better again, because it gives you even more freedom from the constraints of the stock ECU. I won't be needing to go any further than Nistune though, for the new turbo in the 250ish rwkW region I'm going to, with big injectors, and most other things being stockish.
    • Lucky the prp block is supposed to be released next weekend 
    • Wow guys thank you very much for the HUGE info :-) @GTSBoy I have like 30 minutes if test drive with that car/engine and it not stalled once. IMO it ran very smooth so i guess it was not that bad(but asi i said it is stock) That atmo BoV is worse than no BoV or in my case or it is/will be the same? Cuz frankly i rather have little whooosh sound than that sututu 😄 But either way the less harmfull for engine/turbo the better(if the stock is not an option right away) Yeah about that rebuild i talk with guy who will be doing swap and custom pipes...i think i can get stock BoV or get aftermarket which will function the same. Yeah i looked at that R35 option and i try ask my mechanic more about that if he knows. The engine has stock ECU but i can get Nistune for it. On that stock it runs quite well...but i have limited time with it so rly dont know. Ecumaster is this https://www.ecumaster.com/  It is not some dodgy backyard ECU :-)  @MBS206 Yeah but it will be better to have Nistune than the completely stock ECU no? About that "same" atmo/no BoV. The drivebility would be the same? I dont know but i kinda guess that amto BoV would cause more problems than no BoV in my case? Or is the same? You just "change" one sound for the other? Yeah i read many many many topic about hurting the turbo. But no one know anybody that would 100% tell that his turbo/engine blows/get damaged by not running BoV. Of course turbo would be little happier IMO if it has BoV ..but if you do not trash i think i should be good. And as you can see iam already trying to get this right...just working what i have right now :-) Yeah iam kinda the same...i dont want nothing loud and frankly iam not liking that sututu noise that much 😄 i rather have little bit of "whooosh" or no sound at all. Of course in my case it si a completely another world when you came tu Turbo car with open air box and no BoV and you driving the N/A ...all i hear is engine. Here? I heard turbo/sucking and that sututu 😄 @Yeetus So in my case it is really no difference to run no BoV or some atmo BoV like GReddy FV2? The car would drive the same and has "the same" little problems? As i wrote above i kinda thinked that atmo BoV with stock MAF would cause more problems...but then again i dont know much about no BoV either :-)  So to avoid stalling i "cant" just put neutral on stop lights like from higher rpm? Or? Yeah iam already looking for ECU :-)  Yes iam at the same side with thar R35 MAF :-)  @Dose Pipe Sutututu Thank you i (my mechanic/tuner) will look into that) Guess iam taking the Nistune at least :-) 
    • Here's the workaround with Nistune I was talking about, just add in more timing on the decel table And play around with the fuel cut & recovery, it's enough to stop it from stalling on a decel  
    • Hi Apex and welcome! 
×
×
  • Create New...